Stating there's little critical analysis behind those statements and then not justifying them is a cheap declaration in itself. Credit to most people here, they've appropriately explained their criticisms as have a majority of critics. The difference is most fans are just mad that the critical acclaim on this film was non-existent. Furthermore stating that it's not 'just another dumb blockbuster' doesn't mean the filmmakers should get credit for trying something different and failing. Normally they would, but the difference is they barely innovated. They just took elements from franchises outside of Superman and ingratiated them into the character. It might be new to this mythos but isn't to the genre or world around it. Dumb or not, it's not original so no real commendation can be made for trying not to make it 'dumb'.

It's more complicated than that. There were special obstacles to overcome, and in doing so, it had to sacrifice a degree of positive critical reception.

For example, this reboot broke from the style and continuity of the Donner films. It was the first Superman film to do so. But as SR proved years earlier, it had to be done. Batman in 1989 faced similar nostalgia-rooted backlash from those who grew up with Adam West.

MOS was a painful, messy birth. The first scene in the film was the ultimate analogy. Now we have to see if it grows to something incredible.

In other words, there were some unfair complaints leveled at the film. Some posters here are doing damage control.